Why is multi culture a good thing?

[Gimlix]

There are pros and cons to it, like everything in life.

Can you name some?

[Very Tired]

It seems like sunshine and rainbows on paper, until you get to the parts with certain cultures that hold values others find completely unacceptable. Non-assimilating cultures only work to divide us into teams, giving the "us vs. them" mentality.

[Maruka]

Can you name some?

Yeah of course or i wouldn't have said that.

[KrazyK923]

Because it broadens your horizons? Because other people are as, or more, interesting as you?

But we all know what is actually being talked about here. These days when "multi-culturalism" is brought up, it means, "dat muslim agenda" and implies that being open to other cultures somehow means you want to accept and live under sharia law lol.

Also the food. Fuck man the food.

So good.

[Runenwächter]

I dismiss the sick idea of right wing fanatics to get a propaganda discussion going in a liberal multiculturual global forum.

No. What you dismiss is holding a conversation on the basis of facts, or if that is too hard to come by, data to interpret. You even refuse to even address their existence when they are nailed to your forehead.

The fact that this forum exists is not the product of or thanks to multiculturalism. It isnt thanks to ethinic diversisity either. It exists despite both of these factors and first and foremost because diversity in thought prevailed in western civilisation, prospered there and is still somewhat celebrated there. Unlike in multiple cultures that havent had a single scientific achievement in decades. Try checking who advanced science and who got a nobel price in recent history. There is a big condensed blank on the atlas.

You are goddamn right "we", wether your count yourself in or out, want to put that western culture which has achieved so much despite its many failures over others (not ALL others mind you) that have not provided a single thing to the benefit of humanity in decades, if not centuries.

What people advocate for isnt the opposite of multicultrualism, it is "cultural meritocracy". And some just dont have any merit.

[Deleted]

St. Patty's Day

Please, it isn't International Burger King day. St. Patrick's day or Paddy's day. I'm Irish, and I cringe every time I see that.

[Deleted]

That's because you're from the UK and you speak english. It's easy to get on your high horse about people needing to speak your language.

The most effective way to combat racism is for people to open themselves up to other cultures, and stop being so nationalistic. The answer isn't, "You must conform to us". That's your Imperialist mentality speaking, and that's literally never worked in the history of the world.

The most realistic way is to say to all comers this is how it actually works here and tell them to act like it. Different countries work in different ways. It's not like we expect anything unreasonable. Don't molest the kids or the women, don't start fights, don't try to cheat all the time just because we have a different skin tone and so on.

We also really need to start treating unemployed immigrants the same as native unemployed. No fashion points for being brown. You will be despised for being useless. Then again, it wouldn't be a problem if we weren't handing over sums monthly per head that absolutely dwarf the relative levels of income where they come from. Tribalism kills welfare states. This could be compensated with higher tax rates for phenotypes of lesser employment rates.

[Baltasar]

Its not a good thing.

[Macaquerie]

No. What you dismiss is holding a conversation on the basis of facts, or if that is too hard to come by, data to interpret. You even refuse to even address their existence when they are nailed to your forehead.

The fact that this forum exists is not the product of or thanks to multiculturalism. It isnt thanks to ethinic diversisity either. It exists despite both of these factors and first and foremost because diversity in thought prevailed in western civilisation, prospered there and is still somewhat celebrated there. Unlike in multiple cultures that havent had a single scientific achievement in decades. Try checking who advanced science and who got a nobel price in recent history. There is a big condensed blank on the atlas.

You are goddamn right "we", wether your count yourself in or out, want to put that western culture which has achieved so much despite its many failures over others (not ALL others mind you) that have not provided a single thing to the benefit of humanity in decades, if not centuries.

What people advocate for isnt the opposite of multicultrualism, it is "cultural meritocracy". And some just dont have any merit.

The thing about that is, most scientific accomplishments are made by people who go against prevailing cultural norms and think in unorthodox ways not generally accepted by the mainstream. It'd be absurd to credit "Christian civilization" with all of the advances in astronomy in the last few decades, when all of those discoveries were opposed by religious authorities at every turn. Now you could make the argument that Western civilization is more tolerant of quirky oddballs and subversive ideas, but even then they aren't welcomed, and many great thinkers were shunned by the mainstream while at the same time there were plenty of hacks pushing unfounded claims about Aryan supremacy that were held up as legitimate science for decades. And of course, one of the reasons many societies didn't contribute much scientifically was because their countries were colonized by whites who didn't allow the natives to be educated in any capacity, which obviously is going to make it hard to discover anything noteworthy.

[Runenwächter]

The thing about that is, most scientific accomplishments are made by people who go against prevailing cultural norms and think in unorthodox ways not generally accepted by the mainstream. It'd be absurd to credit "Christian civilization" with all of the advances in astronomy in the last few decades, when all of those discoveries were opposed by religious authorities at every turn. Now you could make the argument that Western civilization is more tolerant of quirky oddballs and subversive ideas, but even then they aren't welcomed, and many great thinkers were shunned by the mainstream while at the same time there were plenty of hacks pushing unfounded claims about Aryan supremacy that were held up as legitimate science for decades. And of course, one of the reasons many societies didn't contribute much scientifically was because their countries were colonized by whites who didn't allow the natives to be educated in any capacity, which obviously is going to make it hard to discover anything noteworthy.

There seems to be a prevailing misconception on what the influence of western civilisation, european politics, christianity and the church on the development of philosophy and science actually was. I too can cite many popular cases where the authoritarian church hampered the development of science, but that would not be what historically happend in the larger picture. While not complete let me bring up a few points:
For every famous mind that struggled against the authority of the chruch in their time, there were a dozen that got their funding through the chruch. A famous man himself, Leonardo Da Vinci procured a large amount of the funds he invested into his many projects from his work from the church. But science didnt just evolve throught great minds, but through preserving small steps in a culture of literacy, where the sharing of knowledge became the essential pillar of common prosperity and progress.
Please take a long hard look at how the spread of knowledge changed with the invention of the first printing press. Now, the technology of the press was there and anyone could copy it. We know that the technology itself spread in record time.
Why didnt the invention of the press lead to a similar rise in printed books and publications in every corner of the world?
At the very least, if not their own discoveries, why werent centuries of european history, knowledge, literature and science translated into arabic?
They should have had the easiest time ever, europe had many langues, they had a common written language. The answer is uncomfortable if you have set your mind on blaming europe for the failings of others.

Please provide examples for civilisations where western influence and colonialisation in the past 200 years were a detriment to the native education standarts and pre-existing scientific communities. Because quite frankly for all the ills and horrors commited, I dont know a single example of that.
Why do you think the "white man" had so little trouble coloniallizing in the first place, even in the face of unknown territory, unfamiliar climate, flora, fauna and superiour enemy numbers?

When it comes to colonialisation in general you will find that it, enslavement, oppression and the eradication of native cultures were not a new phenomenon originating in europe, but a preexisting condition the european explorers and conquerors stumbled upon when their moment in history came. You must have heard about the Arab conquest and colonialisation of Northern Africa and the the arab-african slave trade that existed long before Europe or the US colonies got into the business and long after it got out.